The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1887-12-29
THOSE DRUEMERS
L-G-Te-lo- IrsIs-6's Cpzu Let
~ To1c1Ing -Es O-1nEers'
CsEz Answered

TA-TEs-1E- Dec.-5=- --.-Eoz- g5.-
l-=-Z5-D=z- g: "A 20 =s-= z.E=5
pr 1---l1- q - -=i.-.5-- G: - y-5i=s5
>sz-ss 1zsiE5s5 .-5E= = sI-rz-i= Stocki-z
= -z-sz= -z-r--s-i-= 5r---=. ~ czss
-z-l gave T1-- Cr-5c- "a r-t.5-zfzc-.
- ! -ET= t==- zsE=z - C-z-55- = 70 -
-as-= -zzs=5 :! ~ al o=-.=Ti-E "a 20
Z zoo sa-5lz ~ ~ . - .-.- ~
z--c- 1--o w. "a lave :z--s-. : T=--z-s
% . - IzEE "a = = FAR 5yp=
= - zE!=- ~ z5v1s-zt=- = =C--5 s==-.
--ZE- +ro- !1-- C-l-5C- = E.T=- b7
~ t-zs 70 ----s q - --r--=r. =. b.
-E=z- IN al ~ EC7=--z--. E-= BIZ
- r'=-t=zl55! -zs55=.-i--l,5- s.i ts- fs- =-o-5
. t-z- -=1G=ss . =-5s-- Wa l-Tz5s5
l-=T az =---i-=6 = i.= coz--= 0: tie
----t-.- 70 :-0= t-z- t1= rights Of the
c---z=- zr= III % l-psri=-t-y guarded
s-1 Z-z-z--==5 : tzs zc=.T= q his let
-.
Not i-ts-51sE. To- ssy. % .o-ea he
-=---s o 80 cc-i-oTs-sy c. t1= ease Il
s-=sf5oo- b=as-== Il yo1r opi-ioz 11=y
IL 5=!c-3 t-= preliminary question OF =
ri55ietio-- yCz are Ts-y explicit Il
!o7- sEEE==tiO- 70 IL i-5ze PFC
siding Tat tie VALIDITY o. f1= d-zuu=-
tax Ezs Loi iuTo.Tsi proPsrly II the ease
o=to-= hin. While this suggestion usy d
c1-si5=:=5 - i1scc-rs.ely expressed, sl5
. -o- iEt=r65i 20 mean that, II yo1r
option. ;1= validity Of .bs =-s:s lsv =zs
Eot Involved, !o1 are 70 b uniE-s;o-c :
ms = 5e--sb.! - expressing tie opinion
t-si Tot OILY srs !o1 pcsel7i=i Il yc-i
e-!t.si=D from di=c7ssirE the validity o.
tie ~. bscsE=s Of tl= preliminary 3zas-
ti9a q Jurisdiction. BIT That il yo--
opinion the !1dge presiding zas
s.-sly p-sell6sd from reaching tie
Ds-i-= OF the Controversy. YO- szT. a
: !C5zs yo1 had 20 determine tie e-es-
t.oa OF Jurisdiction first -Tais yoz
=s-= con PEELED % 5o,vletLsr rsis=d b o.
posing parties O. not -Ev=-- c1---
mist first settle that gEsstjQa.
This, governor, l. s.sneuisry az. z-5,
= must Be ASSUMED. vas setile5 20 the
s-tIre satisfaction OF the court srd de-
tsfuired il favor Of :he Jurisdiction.
That i vas vrongl! 30 determined : TIE
sErOr. governor. into which yoz have tzl-
lsn. and ths; yo7 have fallen into such 81
error Is matter OF grave surprise TO ne,
a-- A4-- q ~ al WlO ALlE Z SlLlEl u
person or b. reputation. You say the
question vas and Is. in al like cases, can
any federal Judge, less than that Of the
supreme court review, snnul or reverse
the Judgment of any state court Per.
nit NE TO say here that while such {
question vas not before the court IN the
case in question. I accept the question
as put. And second you ask, can
any federal court take it for granted srd
50 far act upon the supposition that BE-
cause 6 drummer OF other person i held
20 answer in the state cour-. even
on charge against which Re
i protected By the federal e7rsfita-
Ton, that the state court on the t-izl vii
not decide the case correctly under al
constitutions and Laws Both these
questions, ny dear Judge. must be
answered IN the negative Right here.
ny dear governor, Is the error into which
sou have fallen. You say, further; If
the party i protected from the sentence,
or impending sentence. n a state court
By the constitution OF the United States
since the wit of hsbsss corpus cannot
be used a. a mode Of appear, let hin pro
coed TO obtain redress or relief by due
course Of Law That due course Is, you